Would you buy a Q with a fixed zoom lens?

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Arguably the father of the Q is the type 107 Leica X Vario. 16MP with a fixed zoom. It's where the Q styling comes from IMHO. It did OK but not brilliantly for Leica.

If Leica could shoehorn a slow fixed 28-70 zoom (say 3.5-5.6 to keep it small). into a Q body would you have one? I think it'd be a pretty ideal general travel camera. Kind of a super DLux.

Gordon

Edited August 29, 2024 by FlashGordonPhotography

[Stuart Richardson]

I think in theory, it could be cool, but I just don't think they could make it with the speed or performance on 60mp to make it worth it for me at least. For me I still think the ideal solution would be for the rumored 43mm Q. That would be flexible enough for what I like to do. Having the wider zoom range could be good, but at least for me, the only point to have a camera like this is for it to be optically stunning. Otherwise something like a Ricoh GRIIIx is a better choice (since the lens is razor sharp and it fits in a pocket). Given the performance of the other cost/size no object Leica zooms I have had, I don't think they can pull it off. The 24-90mm is very good, but not great compared to the primes. Despite the cost, the 30-90mm S lens fares even worse in comparison to the S primes. I use the 90-280mm and like it, and it is praised as one of Leica's best zooms ever, but even it is not in the same league as the modern primes in its focal length. Since the 28mm lens on the Q is already struggling to keep up with the higher resolutions (nice in the center, but not amazing in the edges), I just cannot see how they could make a zoom good enough to make me interested.

[Smogg]

I would buy a Q 30-60 f4 with the internal zooming mechanism without hesitation and this camera would become my main camera.

[Sandokan]

No. I like fixed focal length and moving my feet

[Smogg]

However, I believe that this will not happen. In my opinion, Leica is deliberately worsening the capabilities of Q cameras so that these cameras do not compete with M and SL. Otherwise, I cannot explain the lack of a joystick, BBF, the ability to see the crop not with the frame, but on the entire screen (users have been asking for this for a long time)

[Olaf_ZG]

Not with such minimum aperture, and I guess it will loose some esthetics, which would be a pity.

[Smogg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is not profitable for Leica to produce a universal compact camera. They provoke us to buy cameras of all lines for different needs. That is why I am glad that competition has appeared in the form of Hasselblad X2D. Just imagine that in the X2D in the new firmware they will make a digital zoom on the whole screen with steps of 1.1, 1.25, 1.4, 1.7, 2. Then having X2D with 38 mm will you need Leica Q with zoom?

[JNK100]

If that sort of camera is wanted - buy a D Lux 8.

[Viv]

9 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Arguably the father of the Q is the type 107 Leica X Vario. 16MP with a fixed zoom. It's where the Q styling comes from IMHO. It did OK but not brilliantly for Leica.

If Leica could shoehorn a slow fixed 28-70 zoom (say 3.5-5.6 to keep it small). into a Q body would you have one? I think it'd be a pretty ideal general travel camera. Kind of a super DLux.

Gordon

I would not. I prefer prime lenses.

[LocalHero1953]

I would choose a CL body and 18-56 lens instead.

[Marc B-C]

No. I am very happy with the Q2 and bought it specifically because of its 28mm prime lens

[eva]

Would i buy a Q with a fixed zoom lens?

The answer is: no!

Would i buy a Q with a fixed 40mm lens?

The answer is: Yes

[luetz]

14 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Arguably the father of the Q is the type 107 Leica X Vario. 16MP with a fixed zoom. It's where the Q styling comes from IMHO. It did OK but not brilliantly for Leica.

If Leica could shoehorn a slow fixed 28-70 zoom (say 3.5-5.6 to keep it small). into a Q body would you have one? I think it'd be a pretty ideal general travel camera. Kind of a super DLux.

Gordon

NO...

[M Street Photographer]

vor 16 Stunden schrieb FlashGordonPhotography:

Arguably the father of the Q is the type 107 Leica X Vario. 16MP with a fixed zoom

I think you're confusing something. In my opinion the father or the mother was the Digilux II

I could imagine that a Q with an internally focusing zoom and special imaging like the Digilux II could be successful.

[Le Chef]

No. If I want to zoom I have a CL and 11-23, 18-56, and 55-135 for that.

[pop]

7 hours ago, M Street Photographer said:

In my opinion the father or the mother was the Digilux II

I've always felt that the X Vario was kind of a re-incarnation of the Digilux II. I loved both.

[bobtodrick]

No.

To keep it compact it would be, say a 24-70 F4 (or worse a variable aperture).

A Q with a 24-70 would be huge and unwieldy…look at the size of the 24-70 f2.8 on the SL…can you imagine that on the Q?

[o2mpx]

Will jump on a Q with a 24-70 zoom preferable with 75mb sensor and ibis. The high resolution sensor can enable cropping to 90mm with good detail, and the 24mm can be used for stitching panorama if wider is needed. Won’t need to upgrade the Q2 to Q3.

It’ll be perfect for travel landscapes and I can get rid of the SL2 with the heavy Leica zooms, may not need the M10-R where I’m shooting high shutter speed to avoid shake but living with high ISO’s. No need to upgrade to SL3. No issue with a slower lens to be smaller in size as landscapes can live with f5.6 as maximum aperture. 

Frankly, Leica should be in a position not needing to build “general purpose” cameras, and build one that’s focused on landscape photography. But I’ll keep the X2D where the colors can’t be beat. 

Having said all that, hope the QC is better and not have the post production problems we read about the M11 and the SL3 if the camera will be close to $10k…

Edited August 31, 2024 by o2mpx

[Mikep996]

A zoom on a Q?  No, It defeats the entire purpose of the camera - sufficient resolution to allow "zooming" with the fixed lens.  You can't see any useful difference on a screen between a 90mm-equivalent crop on a Q2 and a shot with an M10R and a 90mm tele-elmarit.   I've done that test a dozen times with various viewers - nobody consistently picks either one as "better."  

Of course, what that really shows you is that it takes rather few megapixels to produce a good photo on a computer/TV screen.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Mute-on]

So, basically a full frame D-Lux 8 … Seems a little pointless as a concept since Leica would have no reason to even attempt to produce it, notwithstanding that it would almost inevitably be far larger than the existing Q. I imagine their reasoning would be along the lines of: fixed lens zoom, get a D-lux 8, full frame zoom, get an SL(3), don’t need autofocus, get an M and use legacy WATE or MATE. None are exactly a zoom lensed Q, but that doesn’t exist (and probably never will).

Nice to fantasise, though. I’d rather have an interchangeable lens Q (sized camera) with L mount (and retaining full frame and EVF, naturally). I would DEFINITELY buy that!

Edited August 31, 2024 by Mute-on